Both theories are correct: evolution

Dear Editor: Donald F Deeprose’s letter in Tuesday’s Herald reopens the long debate on the subject of “Intelligent Design” –v- “Evolution.” Whenever this debate resurfaces, I am puzzled that the most obvious answer never seems to be considered and that is that both theories are correct (at least in general terms if not in explicit detail.) Is it not possible that the Creator’s intelligent design incorporated the ability to evolve?

Some 65 million years ago, a catastrophic event killed off the dinosaurs and most other surface dwelling species. To my mind, it is significant that those species which survived (insects, crocodiles, sharks, etc.) do not seem to have evolved very much since that event and therefore probably do not have the ability to evolve.

This suggests to me that the Creator had concluded that the dinosaurs and other species had not achieved His purpose and that he needed to go back to the drawing board and restart. It obviously would not be very practical to wipe out all species and start again each time changes in the environment made it necessary to make changes to the life forms occupying this planet so He designed the ability for species to evolve to accommodate any changes. Of course, that ability had not featured in His original design which is why the dinosaurs had to be eliminated.

I also observe that there are several very different methods by which species reproduce but all involve some form of egg. Some species lay eggs in a protected place and then leave them to their own devices. Others incubate their eggs using the warmth of their bodies. Marsupials birth a worm-like offspring which then is incubated to maturity in a pouch.

Mammals incubate the egg inside the mother’s body and then give birth to a live offspring. Plant life uses seeds which are distributed by wind or the activities of other species.

What this all suggests to me is that the Creator designed the tools to create life (DNA) and then assigned tasks to teams of lesser beings of His species to create actual life forms.

This would account for the multiplicity of vastly different reproduction methods, all of which start from the same basic tool. Each team having its own idea of the best way to utilize the tools designed by the Creator.

So there is no need to debate “Intelligent Design” –v- “Evolution.” They are perfectly compatible. Brian Butler Penticton incidents around our city.

1. Four-way stop and single stop intersections where cars proceed through the signs without stopping because there is no other vehicle in sight or at the stop signs.

2. Approaching a traffic signal whose light changes to red and cruising right through the red light to make a right turn without coming to a complete stop

3. Following another vehicle (tail-gating) as though you can get the car ahead of you to speed up by exceeding the posted speed limit

4. When coming into town past Redwing and totally ignoring posted speed signs. In light of two large truck and a few car accidents due to speeding.

Of course there are many others, however, these seem to be some obvious ones. I guess the question that we should be asking is: “How many of these have I been guilty of?”

It’s quite easy to rationalize things by thinking that “I’ve never do any of those,” and go on your way. However, have you given any thought to passengers riding with you as to what they might be thinking and feeling?

This is especially true if you have youngsters with you and you exhibit any of these. What sort of message does it convey to them? It will be more or less a monkey see; monkey do scenario when they get the opportunity to drive.

I am sure that there are those out there that feel that these issues aren’t all that big. However, familiarity does breed contempt not so much where other people are concerned but for things such as the above mentioned.

We may get so used to doing these things that one day we will take things for granted and not be as cautious as we should be and wham .... an accident!

Is it time for a self-check? Only you know the answer to that! Ron Barillaro Penticton the hatchery supposed to survive? The monitoring that the developer is now proposing is something that the society asked for back in February (in addition to the emergency water source). It is very puzzling why the developer seems to be proposing this now as something new and innovative.

I am not convinced that our trout hatchery will be protected. I am also not surprised that the Fisheries Society—an agency of the Provincial government—told the District of Summerland multiple times they do not support this development. It also stands to reason why the BC Wildlife Federation (50,000-plus members); some Summerland business owners; and, more than 3,000 people that have signed the petition, do not support the development at this location.

Keep in mind that this one hatchery contributes over $100 million annually to our regional economy. Compare this to the $200,000 in annual property taxes that the District of Summerland say this development will generate.

To voice your concerns, write Summerland Council (council@summerland.ca), send letters to newspapers and attend the public hearing when it is announced. To sign the petition, go to: www.sensiblesummerland.com.

Doug Wahl, MAppSc Professional Biologist

Summerland